Pediatrician gets Refund, Compensation for Failed Lipo Suction Slimming Treatment

Further, the clinic has been directed to pay another Rs 25,000 towards damages as compensation to the Bengaluru based doctor, who had paid around Rs 43,700 to the clinic in the hope of losing weight and reducing her waistline.

The case goes back to 2017 when the pediatrician, who practices in a Bangalore-based reputed hospital, came across the a slimming clinic in the city offering health care facilities including slimming, skin therapy, hair treatment and other related services.

At that time, the complainant doctor was suffering from anterior cruciate ligament tear, for which she was unable to do any physical activity such as running etc.

Also Read: Wrong Diagnosis, Treatment of Steven Johnson Syndrome, NCDRC directs Ayurveda doctor to pay Rs 10 lakh

As the doctor had her brother's wedding, she wanted to reduce her weight by alternate health methods. For this, she approached the clinic, after coming across its advertisement on internet. It was mentioned in the advertisement that the doctor was a leader in introducing latest world-class technology and advanced treatment in its state of arts center and has two decades of experience of organizing slimming solution.

It has been alleged that the therapist of the clinic misrepresented the complainant doctor regarding the quality of services they provide. The doctor had allegedly been assured that after availing its services, the doctor would definitely lose 3-4 inches per session and 5 kg weight loss during the course of treatment. As per the advice of the clinic, the doctor had undergone body composition analysis and her weight was documented as 66 kgs. However, at that time the doctor had informed that she was wearing heavier garments and had also suggested to undergo the test the next day.

After the body composition analysis the doctor had undergone "nonsurgical lipo suction", which cost around Rs 17,000 and she was assured that by the said therapy, the abdominal waist of 2 to 3 inches would get reduced and she would lose at least 5 kgs of body weight.

After this, the doctor underwent several machine sessions such as body firm toning, tightening, cello session etc. However, even after the second session of Lipo Suction, there was no weight loss, or reduction in the waistline as promised. Following this, the therapist suggested the doctor of having "five tummy tuck session" which was promised to do miracle.

In fact, the doctor was also given a special discount price on the occasion of anti-obesity week and the doctor paid another Rs 6,000 and available the "Tekar Therapy" for reducing weight. However, the doctor complained that even after going through the said therapy, there was no such significant reduction in the body weight or loss of waistline.

Believing better results, the complainant doctor underwent 5 more sessions of Lipo Suction by paying another Rs 20,000 for the treatment. Thereafter, even though the doctor insisted that her measurements get documented, the staffs of the clinic allegedly denied to do so.

Consequently, alleging deficiency in the services offered by the Clinic and accusing it of false publication and advertisement, the complainant doctor approached the Bengaluru Rural and Urban Additional District Consumer Court, and asked for a refund of Rs 43,700 along with interest at 12% per annum till payment of entire amount, along with Rs 5 lakh as compensation for causing mental harassment, torture.

On the other hand, the clinic denied all allegations and the Clinic doctor had informed the complainant doctor that due to the medications for ligament tear, there will be negligible weight loss only. In fact, the doctor was also informed that there was a strict no refund policy.

Apart from this, the complainant had also executed a declaration stating that on ""my own free will due consent to join the program the effect and nature and outcome of the program has been explained to me. I have also been explained that the result of each program may vary from person to person depending upon the individual body composition, health status metabolism and other factors including diet and lifestyle and as such results of the program cannot be guaranteed lack of results will not be construed as deficiency of service."

Further, the clinic alleged that at the end of 3^rd session, the complainant had lost 3 inches and she wanted further tightening of her abdomen and that is why "tekar therapy" was availed by the doctor.

It was alleged on the behalf of the clinic that even though the doctor had underwent significant weight loss, and she was instructed to strictly follow her diet and exercise to maintain her body weight, she would always come back with more weight for the next sessions.

After going through the entire case record, and the body composition analysis, along with the measurement of weight from day one till the end of the sessions, the consumer court noted that the on the commencement of the session the weight of the complainant was 66.03 kgs and on the last day it was 65.02 kgs. So, there was altogether loss of just 1 kg of body weight. Further, there was almost no change in the waistline of the doctor.

"When this is taken into consideration, though OP claims in the advertisement that there will be significant weight loss after obtaining the session of therapy, there is no change at all in the body weight of the complainant," noted the commission at this outset.

Referring to the brochure of the clinic which advertised that one person had lost from 85 kgs to 22 kgs in four months, the commission observed, "When this newsletter is taken in to consideration it is a clear from the advertisement that substantial weight reduction has to take place."

"On the other hand, the documents produced clearly go to show that there was not even reduction of 1 kg and more. It is also mentioned in the advertisement Ex.P7 slim down two sizes from your waist in just 14 days, VIBES size zero program 2000+ successful clients, 100% money back guaranteed, book now for free consultation. It is also mentioned there the coolest way to lose fat Cryolipolysis - A Non-invasive fat freezing technology, get rid of fat, no surgical, FDA approved," noted the Commission.

Taking all these facts and circumstances into consideration, the Commission noted, "it becomes clear that though OP advertised to provide all these facilities to get the weight reduction and the waistlines reduction within a time span, the same has not worked out to the complainant though she had undergone the therapy's as prescribed by the OP. There is no evidence by OP that complainant has not followed the diet and has over eaten. When this is taken into consideration we are of the opinion there is deficiency in service on the part of OP in not providing proper treatment for the weight loss and also the reduction in the waistline. Though advertised in the web site which amounts to misrepresenting the facts, misleading the public and also false advertisement and publications."

The Commission also relied upon the decision of District Consumer Forum Warangal in a similar case, where the court had held that this type of advertisement are most dangerous and they can also have a severe repercussion on the health of the consumer. This kind of misleading advertisements are highly objectionable, deplorable and also patently illegal. The false and misleading advertisements continue to exploit the vulnerability of consumers.

"In this case also as discussed already the advertisement made by OP is misleading and amounts to false advertisement making valuable consumers be exploited," the Commission noted referring to the District Consumer Forum judgment.

Allowing the complaint, the Consumer court order, "the complainant is to be refunded with the amount she has paid to the OP i.e. Rs.34,960/- (i.e. less 20% of the amount paid by the complainant i.e Rs.43,700/-, to meet the office expenses and other incidental office expenses by OP) along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of admission i.e. 22.11.2017 till the date payment of amount. Further complainant has undergone mental trauma physical strain and has spent time to get the treatment at the cost of her professional time which has to be compensated. Complainant has suffered mentally, physically and also financially for which we direct OP to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards damages and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation and incidental expenses."